Put itchy dust in Grover's panties then. I want him to play dumb, and conservative leaders have a taste for playing Dorothy. Three decades of evangelicals working to gain political influence and what we get are people that believe in spontaneous generation and celestial cheese.

Yes this article is about 'Grover' -- everyone seems to be on a first name basis with the idiot. But still one wonders why...

As a lifelong sycophant for the rich, Norquist hasn't contributed a red cent to the US economy, added a single job or grown a single productive company. So one wonders why he's so well known ... Here's a good quote attributed to him '"When I became 21, I decided that nobody learned anything about politics after the age of 21." No life-long learning here is there?

This goes a long way to answer the question why -- this puts him squarely in the Republican know-nothing camp (along with the 47% ers, birthers, southern racists, and creationist nutcakes). He has made a living by closing his eyes to reality and screaming as loud as he can a single nonsense message. Too bad the reality wing of the Republican party (including the latest loosing Pres. candidate) have to cow-tow to these nutcakes if they want to try to get elected to anything. The American people deserve better reasoning than his, they deserve more patriotic people to rise up and oppose these well-funded nuts (like his buddy Rove, last name basis for him!) and the Republican party will always struggle as long as they embrace these unpatriotic ideologies.

Did I miss something or does this post really have nothing at all to do with Norquist? He's not quoted. It seems like his name is used as short-hand for "anti-tax primary challenge" though I'm not sure why. Is there any reason to believe he'll support a primary challenger even if Chambliss doesn't actually vote for a tax increase? BTW, Norquist said that last year's vote to end ethanol subsidies violated the pledge but he was universally ignored and he didn't do anything about it.

Sometimes, I wonder if a serious Machiavellian among the Democrats isn't funding people like Norquist. Just to cause more extreme crazies to get nominated by the Republicans, and so make it easier to elect more Democrats.

Of course Grover Norquist's main goal is to stay relevant, just like a senator's main goal is to be re-elected. Mr. Norquist's got to eat just like the rest of us, and I don't certainly appreciate people trying to make my job irrelevant.

Besides what is a burned out lobbyist going to do? Start a rent-a-grassroots operation like Ralph Reed?

Sure, the fact that Mr. Obama signed on to the notion that we have a debt crisis, rather than an employment crisis, has been a big disappointment.

So I'm not happy about his budget proposal - definitely not enough stimulus being offered - but at least it's not as destructive as the GOP proposals are.

Yes, I'd like to see a more rapid recovery to take us where GDP would have been on the pre-crash trajectory, but there is some growth now. And yes, the thought of reversing that growth and falling back into recession scares me. If that means I scare easily - well, okay, I scare easily.

And the downward spiral in which ideological purity trumps all other factors continues. I'm looking forward to the day in which political contests devolve to nothing more than who can grunt the loudest, as any single word uttered may offend some critical interest group.

Since 1995 the GOP has been an abomination; just right for the ridiculous Norquist. But the Yahoo extremes of the Republican Party have just about run their course. I look forward to a time, not far off, when I can in good conscience vote for a Republican again.

I think the key to Norquists demise is in his own rhetoric. He stands by the pledge as, not to him, but to the American people. This should give republicans plenty of room (and apparently does, although at the expense of Norquist) to maneuver in the current political climate. What interests me is the idea that money doesn't change politics, until Norquist threatens a primary challenge.